Intake wheel motors

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

At this point, seems like the best choices are between the BAG, the mini-CIM, or the 775Pro.
...

I concur, but will add that some intakes (depending many factors) will work well with an AM 9015 reduced through a BB P60. This combination saves some space and weight relative to the VersaPlanetary, which might be a good trade against the VP's benefits.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by thinker&planner

95 in 2002 looks amazing. But so does this.

Wow! Pretty amazing intake.

[Charger]

well, i learned it in a hard way but i can say that using andymark motors with gearboxes (like pg71) are a bit ineficient, in our aerial assist year we used pg71's in intake and it takes forever for it to get the ball totally. Last year we used window motors in our intake mechanism, it was better than pg71's but still it was too slow. However, this year, there was a special offseason event in Turkey with game of 2006, aim high and we built another robot for that offseason. In that robot we decided to use mini CIM motor connected to a CIMple box connected to wheels with chains and i can say that it almost worked perfectly. Still, bag motors with plenataries will probably be better but we dont have that much oppurtunutiy and parts in Turkey so we have never been able to test that.

[GeeTwo]

With PG71s, it's hard to get the wheel big enough for a decent tip speed. PG27s are nearly three times as fast. We used a PG-27 with a 6" wheel for our Aerial Assist pickup. For our tennis ball pickup in offseason, we used BAG motors and 5:1 reduction - plenty fast even with a 4" wheel; almost too fast for our purposes (we had a few balls jam inside until we made some adjustments).

[Charger]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

With PG71s, it's hard to get the wheel big enough for a decent tip speed. PG27s are nearly three times as fast. We used a PG-27 with a 6" wheel for our Aerial Assist pickup. For our tennis ball pickup in offseason, we used BAG motors and 5:1 reduction - plenty fast even with a 4" wheel; almost too fast for our purposes (we had a few balls jam inside until we made some adjustments).

Wheels are good, but using tubes connected to motors are considerable too. With right measurements, you get a larger connection with ball and it makes it easier to take the ball.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Charger

Wheels are good, but using tubes connected to motors are considerable too. With right measurements, you get a larger connection with ball and it makes it easier to take the ball.

What size, shape, orientation, and material tubes are you talking about? How do you mount them to the motors?

[Charger]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

What size, shape, orientation, and material tubes are you talking about? How do you mount them to the motors?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JScN8XKEF-s

here is my old team's offseason robot. They used cylinders connected to mini cim and cimple box via chain. and I remember robots using cylinders in 2014 game such as cheesy poofs

[Ty Tremblay]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

What size, shape, orientation, and material tubes are you talking about? How do you mount them to the motors?

Here's a new product from CRP.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Charger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JScN8XKEF-s

here is my old team's offseason robot. They used cylinders connected to mini cim and cimple box via chain. and I remember robots using cylinders in 2014 game such as cheesy poofs

??????????? The only way I could make sense of your earlier post was if you were using "tubes" that were bigger and softer than a 6" wheel; what you were talking about was neither; smaller than most wheels and not apparently grippier. You certainly wouldn't want to run those off of a PG71, or even a PG27.

Continuing with the rollers yes, we did horizontal rollers with belts on our 2012 Rebound Rumble robot. In that case, we were using the belt run as our "storage area" for up to (IIRC) four balls. As such, we wanted the rollers to run slowly. The balls were soft enough that we could drive over them even without the rollers turning. Once they were trapped between the rollers and a backing sheet of plastic, we turned on the rollers to do the pickup. We powered those rollers with a window motor; It took about two or three seconds for a ball to make it from the floor all the way up to the trigger mechanism. But I didn't think of those as intakes so much as pickups; perhaps too subtle a distinction.

[thatprogrammer]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

??????????? The only way I could make sense of your earlier post was if you were using "tubes" that were bigger and softer than a 6" wheel; what you were talking about was neither; smaller than most wheels and not apparently grippier. You certainly wouldn't want to run those off of a PG71, or even a PG27.

Continuing with the rollers yes, we did horizontal rollers with belts on our 2012 Rebound Rumble robot. In that case, we were using the belt run as our "storage area" for up to (IIRC) four balls. As such, we wanted the rollers to run slowly. The balls were soft enough that we could drive over them even without the rollers turning. Once they were trapped between the rollers and a backing sheet of plastic, we turned on the rollers to do the pickup. We powered those rollers with a window motor; It took about two or three seconds for a ball to make it from the floor all the way up to the trigger mechanism. But I didn't think of those as intakes so much as pickups; perhaps too subtle a distinction.

I don't know what material they put on their tubes, but most teams that use them put Polyurethane from McMaster Carr on them. (Or super-soft surgical tubing in the case of aerial assist balls).